Ravindra Prasan Rannan-Eliya (
Nilmini Wijemunige is a research associate at the Institute for Health Policy.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Jan;40(1):70-81. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01409. Epub 2020 Dec 2.
Experts agree that reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is critical in controlling coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but decision makers disagree on how much testing is optimal. Controlling for interventions and ecological factors, we used linear regression to quantify testing's impact on COVID-19's average reproduction number, which represents transmissibility, in 173 countries and territories (which account for 99 percent of the world's COVID-19 cases) during March-June 2020. Among interventions, PCR testing had the greatest influence: a tenfold increase in the ratio of tests to new cases reported reduced the average reproduction number by 9 percent across a range of testing levels. Our results imply that mobility reductions (for example, shelter-in-place orders) were less effective in developing countries than in developed countries. Our results help explain how some nations achieved near-elimination of COVID-19 and the failure of lockdowns to slow COVID-19 in others. Our findings suggest that the testing benchmarks used by the World Health Organization and other entities are insufficient for COVID-19 control. Increased testing and isolation may represent the most effective, least costly alternative in terms of money, economic growth, and human life for controlling COVID-19.
专家一致认为,逆转录-聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测对于控制 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)至关重要,但决策者对于最佳检测量存在分歧。在控制干预措施和生态因素的情况下,我们使用线性回归来量化检测对 COVID-19 平均繁殖数(代表传染性)的影响,该繁殖数在 2020 年 3 月至 6 月期间在 173 个国家和地区(占世界 COVID-19 病例的 99%)进行了检测。在干预措施中,PCR 检测的影响最大:报告的新病例与检测的比例增加十倍,可使平均繁殖数降低 9%,而检测水平则有所不同。我们的研究结果表明,在发展中国家,流动性减少(例如就地避难命令)的效果不如发达国家。我们的研究结果有助于解释为什么某些国家能够几乎消除 COVID-19,而其他国家的封锁措施却未能减缓 COVID-19 的传播。我们的发现表明,世界卫生组织和其他实体使用的检测基准对于 COVID-19 的控制而言并不充分。就金钱,经济增长和人类生命而言,增加检测和隔离可能是控制 COVID-19 的最有效,成本最低的替代方法。